DrWolverine
U19 Debutant
The better bowler
Saqlain easily if it is 10 yearsBecause of longeviety Murali wins easily.
Saqlain was probably better at peak.
Yes pretty much I have come to this as well.Because of longeviety Murali wins easily.
Saqlain was probably better at peak.
Stop quoting the meaningless rankings all the time.Murali had a peak between 2001 - 2005 where he was better than Saqlain at his peak. Saqlain's top ICC rating is 805. For Murali it is 913.
That is 2001 to 2005, Murali took 182 wickets in 106 matches at 17.96. if you Include 2006 then 218 at 20.2
That is basically as about 90% of Saqlain's career
Those rankings are way better than partisan / nationalistic rants that is a pain on grey matterStop quoting the meaningless rankings all the time.
Rankings kind of also depends on your quality of opposition, or no?Those rankings are way better than partisan / nationalistic rants that is a pain on grey matter
Yes it seems. They have not divulged the methodology. If a bowler performs well against team with high rank bats, the rise of the rating would be high. Then doing poor against trash sides will hurt as well.Rankings kind of also depends on your quality of opposition, or no?
Ah yes never seen any of that from you either.Those rankings are way better than partisan / nationalistic rants that is a pain on grey matter
So you agree on Kapil Dev being GOAT ODI AR without competition.Those rankings are way better than partisan / nationalistic rants that is a pain on grey matter
never doubted Kapil as ODI cricketer.So you agree on Kapil Dev being GOAT ODI AR without competition.
Another oneAh yes never seen any of that from you either.
They just get @Daemon to make all the numbers up IMO.Yes it seems. They have not divulged the methodology. If a bowler performs well against team with high rank bats, the rise of the rating would be high. Then doing poor against trash sides will hurt as well.